June 25, 2015 It was disclosed in June that there were 15 emails between Mrs. Clinton and her longtime adviser Sidney Blumenthal, mainly dealing with events in Libya, that Mrs. Clinton did not provide to the State Department. In response to that development, a Clinton campaign official said, “We do not have a record of other correspondence between her and Mr. Blumenthal beyond that which was turned over to the State Department.” The official added, “We do not recognize many of those materials and cannot speak to their origin.” — The New York Times

...

Analysis

The campaign has not said what happened to these emails. But its failure to turn them over to the State Department has raised questions about whether Mrs. Clinton gave the department all the messages pertaining to her work as the nation’s top diplomat.

Questions have been raised! And answered, obviously - there is no question that not all the relevant emails were turned over. The only question might be, was this some sort of archiving error, or, well, editorial discretion as exercised by Team Clinton?

For the love of God, I wish someone had the balls to ask Hilligula this question:

Madam Secretary, you've continually mentioned that Ambassador Stevens was a friend of yours--you've often called him by his first name, Chris. As you no doubt are aware, Ambassador Stevens was openly gay. Knowing this, why weren't you even more concerned with the welfare of this man and what he represented a to this important, vital constituency of this country? Do you not like gay men? Why not?

POMPEO: Yes, ma'am. May -- put the next poster up, please. Madam Secretary, you're not likely to know who these two folks are, do you?

CLINTON: I do not.

POMPEO: The one on the left is Mohamed al-Zahawi. He was the head of Ansar al-Sharia, a jihadist group based in Benghazi. The man on your left is Wissam bin Hamid. Were you aware that your folks in Benghazi, Libya met with that man on the -- within 48 hours before the attack?

CLINTON: I know nothing about any meeting with him.

POMPEO: On September 11th, on the day that he was killed, Ambassador Stevens sent a cable through the State Department talking about his meeting with Mr. Bin Hamid. Are you aware of that cable?

CLINTON: No, I'm not.

POMPEO: He said -- in his cable, he said they -- referring to Mr. Wissam Bin Hamid -- they wanted an introductory meeting, they were here. They asked us what we needed to bring security to Benghazi. So your officials were meeting with this man on the ground in Benghazi, Libya, discussing security, two days before that. But in August of that same year, the United States government had said that this very man was, quote, "a young rebel leader who allegedly fought in Iraq under the flag of al-Qaida."

Were you aware that our folks were either wittingly or unwittingly meeting with al-Qaida on the ground in Benghazi, Libya, just hours before the attack?

CLINTON: I know nothing about this, Congressman.

POMPEO: I think that's deeply disturbing. I think the fact that your team was meeting...

I think people are hearing a lot of things about Hillary that are damaging and harmful to her image
Her trying to weasel out of unsolicited is a perfect example and the campaign ad writes itself as does her complete lack of overall knowledge

Just a comment from the last thread (alas, these days I seem always to be a few hours behind) on Ryan and the whole speaker "mess." Not surprisingly I agree with CH on this:

Democracy can be messy; we can have lots and lots of votes without violating the Constitution.

I see so many "conservatives" going along with the idea that the speaker fight is an "unmitigated disaster" and "chaos." I honestly don't get it. Maybe it's just inside-the-beltway BS.

And from TK:I believe [Ryan's] spineless nature favors the agenda of a leftist more so than most members of the freedom caucus.

The problem with Ryan is not that he's a leftist or that he's generally spineless, but he's a policy wonk, and that doesn't instinctively first ask "Why is government even involved in this?" Rather, they ask "How can government do it better?" That's a bad starting point.

I am trying to be as impartial as I can make myself, given that I despise this woman.

What I am getting is a picture of someone who really didn't know how to administer a department, what her responsibilities really were, and didn't take security issues seriously.

I have learned that hardly any requests for security made it to her desk, that State people met with Al Qaeda people the day before, that some of Sidney Blumenthal's emailswere written by someone else and she passed them along without attribution or without knowing the source, blacking out Blumenthal's name.

I have learned that Ambassador Stevens didn't have her email address, but Blumenthal did.

These democrat efforts with softball questions and statements allowing her to filibuster are pointless, because Hillary drones on with boilerplate platitudes which sound like Charlie Brown's teacher to me.

By the way, Sean Smith's uncle was on Fox and he is highly irate that she is trying to place the responsibility for being in Benghazi on the victims. He said, "Yes, they knew there was danger, but they expected someone would have their back!"

I'm listening as a person used to trials. I understand this isn't a court if law. I'm not impressed with Gowdy. I think Hillary hasnt been touched. I hope we aren't hanging beating her in 16 on this hearing.

I think the attitudes on Rodham regarding Banghazi have been locked in for each voter for a long time and this hearing won't change a thing. The shocking thing to me is that 404's callous disregard and lying about the cause has remained untouched.

COL. WOOD: Yes sir, I did. I assisted Eric Nordstrom in preparation of the requests for support, in as much as they dealt with SST support. I reviewed some of those documents and a � and assisted in the preparation of those. I�d like to � I�d like to add also that there was frustration from the beginning.

The initial � or perhaps this � it was the second request for extension that occurred on April 5th � Ambassador Cretz encountered some difficulty in understanding what was going on; he was getting conflicting signals from DOD and DOS. I got him together with General Ham; they worked out a complete understanding. And General Ham made it very clear to Ambassador Cretz that he could have the SST as long as he needed them. This was a great interagency cooperation, and that was made very clear to him.

It was also made clear to Joan Polaschik, who took over as charge d'affairs in between Ambassador Cretz and Ambassador Stevens. He came personally, and told her that.

He also had a VTC with Ambassador Stevens and reiterated that same point that the SST was his as long as he needed them; all he had to do was request them, and General Ham was perfectly willing to provide that support.

*******************

For whatever reason--The State Department did not accept the security.

House Republican leaders are unlikely to bring up a bill that would tie a debt-ceiling increase to several other conservative policy proposals, underscoring the party’s deep divisions over how to tackle the debt ceiling.

...

Because so few Republicans are willing to vote for increasing the federal government’s borrowing limit, GOP leaders will likely have to turn to Democrats to help them increase the debt limit with no policy strings attached. But Republican leaders may not be ready yet to bring such a bill, known as a “clean” debt-ceiling increase, to the floor yet.

"Because so few Republicans are willing to vote for increasing the federal government’s borrowing limit, GOP leaders will likely have to turn to Democrats to help them increase the debt limit with no policy strings attached."

See this is just what I am talking about. If the situation was reversed, the Dems would get something out of it. People on the Right who follow this are furious about this.

No one believes the GOP "leadership".

Now nobody can be this stupid,. not even the GOP.

I am telling you that they are going to blow it next year, as they have on the last 2 Presidential election. They living ina dream worls.

When some like Cantor say something like that, it just infuriates people. And if we are honest with ourselves, across the nation when people here that they will think something along the lines of "radical populists? Is that a new name for the goyem?"

These things are just devastating for the GOP.

They need to do some soul searching and figure out if just what is going on. They need to stop lying to conservatives. They need to come to us with open hands.

Instead they behave like condescending jerks.

They need to understand what 4 more years of Democrat rule will do to this country.